Real and dangerous answer to Carpe Donktum's question on why so many Dems (liberals) -- Only on Truth Social.

https://truthsocial.com/@LTWalkerTS4/posts/109248735581700827

THE DAILY FUDD: E255: "Another California gun hobbyist attempting a technicality workaround when he could just get a featureless fighting rifle."

MY COMMENT: "If the Californians spent less time in the hobby of trying to find technicalities in their State's laws, and more time just acquiring and practicing with a decent CA-legal fighting rifle, they'd be in much better shape to work for restoration of Patriots to power in DC, and then beg for intervention by federal and other-State forces to liberate them. They'd just have to rest under military occupation for a couple of generations at their expense."

The effort here is to take part of the current law to override the general definition of "pistol grip." (I discuss that particular "evil feature" in TDF 54.) One line that confuses me is that the YouTuber claims "federal law" states that a certain aspect of what California law would require in handling a weapon is "unsafe." I have asked about it: MY COMMENT: "One question: Where does federal law discuss what is "unsafe" in this regard? The Consumer Product Safety Commission is explicitly barred by Congress from issuing safety regs for firearms due to an attempt in the 1970s to do a backdoor handgun ammo ban."

TDF INDEX: Cats, Guns, and National Security: THE DAILY FUDD index.  https://catsgunsandnationalsecurity.blogspot.com/2021/03/the-daily-fudd-index.html

THE DAILY FUDD: E254: "VIDEO: 'Donald Trump's guns.'"

Includes, fittingly, a .45.

Donald Trump's Guns -The Firearm Blog

Transcript of video above.

TDF INDEX: Cats, Guns, and National Security: THE DAILY FUDD index.  https://catsgunsandnationalsecurity.blogspot.com/2021/03/the-daily-fudd-index.html

Shooter of Independence, Missouri firefighter skates on defense justification -- Breakdown of pertinent pros and cons here.

Prosecutor’s Office Won’t Pursue Murder Charge for Killing Kansas City Firefighter - Claims it was 'Self-Defense' When Woman Shot Him During Fight with Felon (thegatewaypundit.com)

Scoring rundown:

Pro-firefighter:
- White.
- Seems to have been standing up for a woman (race unknown).
- Shooter is Black (female).
- Black male is felon and Prohibited Person.

Pro-shooter:
- Defense case upholding acting based on limited knowledge.

Kevin Jamison, an attorney and author of Missouri Weapons and Self-Defense Law, agrees that the woman’s actions against the firefighter were warranted. He told FOX4KC, “Technically it’s called the defense of justification and your justification is you are saving the life of another person.” He added, “The girlfriend is only constrained by what she reasonably believed to be the circumstances. If she didn’t see the start of the fight, all she knows is her boyfriend is getting strangled.”

CONCLUSION: Reluctantly, without further evidence, the case has to go to the shooter, as the precedent is useful in the long run. The more "defense" can be stretched, the easier combating the other side will be when the time comes. And the case is protected against race-baiting.

Most likely, though, the prosecutor caved on pushing the case due to the ever-present threat of BLM rioting.

QUESTION: The weapon seems too large to have been concealed, including an extended magazine. Yet story suggests its owner pulled it, as if concealed on his person. Hmm...